Eons is a ridiculous claim. I doubt you'll convince anybody to change anything if you use ridiculous claims and exaggerations. Try sticking with facts instead. The fact is that it takes years for projects to produce any useful conclusions. It doesn't happen overnight, or in 2 weeks or even 2 months. The fact is a certain amount of data needs to be crunched and shortening deadlines doesn't speed up that process. It speeds up with more hosts attaching to the project, faster hardware, science app optimization, greater resource shares assigned to the project by volunteers and probably other factors I've not thought of.

Which gap are you referring to? The gap between the time you return your result and the time it gets verified and awarded credits? That has nothing to do with how much time the research takes. The fact is that after your result gets verified and awarded credit the result gets dumped into a database where it might sit for several weeks or months before it gets further analysis and it may be years before any of that analysis yields conclusions that are useful to anyone. It seems like you have little understanding of how real science is accomplished and how much time it requires. You seem to think that your result plus a matching result from your wingman is all the scientists need to call the newspaper and tell them they've discovered something new and fantastic. Nope! That ain't how it works. It takes hundreds of thousands of results plus many months of further analysis of those results and shortening deadlines doesn't speed that up by even 1 second.

Don't worry, they are crunching. The computer is running 24/7 so it can make it in time.

Did the same with the latest batch and got an average runtime of 3.22 hours (25.78 hours total).
Generating 640 points (at 80 per WU), for an average of 24.83 credits per hour.