Really there is no reason to get worked up.
The point I was making is that the experiments detect antineutrinos not by any signature observed in the detector, but by where they came from. This is defining the particle detected by the theoretical model.
Reines and Cowan Detected the first neutrinos, circa like.., the early 1950's. The only thing that distinguishes antineutrinos from neutrinos as far as I have seen in the experimental data, is determined by the source not the detector. The difference remains theoretical, thus some (theorists) still consider the possibility that the neutrino is its own antiparticle.
The theory does accurately predicts many things. That does not make it proof in and of itself. It is predictive more than descriptive. To say anything else is about the same as saying, we know it all, we may as well go home.
You really want to spend more time on this?
No... I think you have made it clear what you think of mainstream science.